PDA

View Full Version : ESPN's Brad Edwards projects Boise State as BCS #1


RealityCheck
10-11-2010, 01:13 PM
Six weeks into the college football season and one week before the first Bowl Championship Series standings are released, there are 13 unbeaten teams in all three polls.

So who'd be the BCS' No. 1 if the standings came out today? Would it be consensus No. 1 Ohio State, the top team in The Associated Press, USA Today and Harris polls? Or maybe fellow unbeaten Oregon, ranked No. 2 and earning first-place votes in all three polls?

According to the projection of ESPN's Brad Edwards, it's consensus No. 3 Boise State.

According to the projections, the No. 1 Buckeyes would place fifth in the BCS standings, percentage points behind Oklahoma.

Edwards projects the unbeaten Broncos, the highest-ranked team from a non-automatic qualifying conference, as the top team in the standings by a comfortable margin, followed by Oregon. The top two teams in the final regular-season BCS standings play in the BCS National Championship Game.

Fellow BCS buster TCU places third in Edwards' projections, followed by Oklahoma at .8425 and Ohio State at .8421.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5673225

All I know is that I'm tired of seeing the same teams in the title game. Boise deserves a shot at the national title for years, and this year should be THE year.

Shane P. Hallam
10-11-2010, 01:26 PM
It won't be if there are two other undefeated teams. They will fall...hard.

Brent
10-11-2010, 01:39 PM
I think/hope Nevada beats them.

RealityCheck
10-11-2010, 01:42 PM
It won't be if there are two other undefeated teams. They will fall...hard.
I think Boise and TCU will go to the NC over Auburn and maybe even LSU or Oklahoma.

Conferences are just overrated. The BCS also considers, a lot, weeks in the ranks.

Bengals78
10-11-2010, 02:00 PM
Note to top teams:
Stop playing good teams. Schedule two mediocre ones at best, barely win, play powder puff conference teams and play for a NC.
Good message to send.

steelernation77
10-11-2010, 03:58 PM
Boise State and TCU have no business ever being in a National Championship game.

Michigan
10-11-2010, 04:08 PM
I think Boise and TCU will go to the NC over Auburn and maybe even LSU or Oklahoma.


I'd be pretty upset if that happened. SOS should be a big factor, even if its unfair to legitimately good non-AQ teams.

Rabscuttle
10-11-2010, 05:12 PM
The rankings will change significantly as BSU's and TCU's schedules weaken over time and the other top teams get into the meat of their schedule. Boise has to hope for VaTech and Oregon State to run the table to have anything noteworthy on their schedule. VaTech could possibly do that with their schedule and climb back into the rankings to help Boise's case. OSU finishes against USC, Stanford and Oregon. Hoping for the Beavers to be ranked when all is said and done is pushing it. Nevada may climb a bit, but they will get murdered in the polls with a loss to Boise.

Sniper
10-11-2010, 05:14 PM
Boise State and TCU have no business ever being in a National Championship game.

I love you.

Smooth Criminal
10-11-2010, 07:15 PM
I think Boise and TCU will go to the NC over Auburn and maybe even LSU or Oklahoma.

Conferences are just overrated. The BCS also considers, a lot, weeks in the ranks.

That's a complete joke. You think they'd make it over Auburn or LSU, that would have to go through a ridiculously tough SEC schedule.

I can understand arguing Boise over Nebraska, who plays a very weak schedule, but anyone other then them is just wrong.

If Boise wants a national title they're gonna have to do more then play the schedule they do. I don't want to hear how it's not their fault who they play, because it's no one elses job to get them a schedule.

Shane P. Hallam
10-11-2010, 07:28 PM
I think Boise and TCU will go to the NC over Auburn and maybe even LSU or Oklahoma.

Conferences are just overrated. The BCS also considers, a lot, weeks in the ranks.

You are joking, right? An undefeated SEC team doesn't go over Boise? An undefeated Big 12 team? You can say it is overrated, but it sure counts.

brat316
10-11-2010, 07:29 PM
I actually hope both of them play each other. After that people will finally realize something is wrong with the way the NCAA FBS Champion is picked.

DeathbyStat
10-11-2010, 07:45 PM
Note to top teams:
Stop playing good teams. Schedule two mediocre ones at best, barely win, play powder puff conference teams and play for a NC.
Good message to send.

Completely agree why schedule anyone outside of the sunbelt and the Mac

DeathbyStat
10-11-2010, 07:46 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5673225

All I know is that I'm tired of seeing the same teams in the title game. Boise deserves a shot at the national title for years, and this year should be THE year.

Is this guy usually accurate?

brat316
10-11-2010, 07:48 PM
get rid of this system then we wouldn't have to argue.

brat316
10-11-2010, 07:57 PM
Is this guy usually accurate?

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?page=roadtobcs/0901

last year

Smooth Criminal
10-11-2010, 07:58 PM
The system is broken, but rewarding teams for playing the weakest schedules definitely isn't the solution.

SickwithIt1010
10-11-2010, 08:08 PM
Boise State and TCU have no business ever being in a National Championship game.

Thats where youre wrong, why the **** not?

Boise comes out every year and throws out an open challenge to everyone in the country because they wanna raise their SOS....they even make the challenge saying they dont have to set up a home at home....they will go to play at the other teams' place. Its not their fault that every team in college football is scared of em because they dont have a ****** sack.


They have done everything they have been asked to do....they deserve the chance if they go undefeated. Stop being a hater.

brat316
10-11-2010, 08:10 PM
Reward them so more people realize it broken and then want to do something about it.

Pretty much once the big conference have a whole in their pocket from not getting that BCS Championship game, they'll want to do something about it.

SickwithIt1010
10-11-2010, 08:17 PM
http://www.gberatings.com/sos/

And BSU's schedule is actually not that much weaker than most teams....i mean cmon OSU is sitting at 93 for shits' sake. and Oregon at 113....really scheduling some juggernauts.

dabears10
10-11-2010, 08:18 PM
What happens if at the end of the season Virginia Tech wins the ACC and Oregon State wins the Pac-10? Does Boise get any credit for beating two BCS bowl teams?

descendency
10-11-2010, 08:18 PM
Note to top teams:
Stop playing good teams. Schedule two mediocre ones at best, barely win, play powder puff conference teams and play for a NC.
Good message to send.

I hate to tell you, but this has been the strategy for quite a few national champions in the past.

"Tough conference games" and an out of conference schedule that would be easy for an FCS team.

brat316
10-11-2010, 08:39 PM
What happens if at the end of the season Virginia Tech wins the ACC and Oregon State wins the Pac-10? Does Boise get any credit for beating two BCS bowl teams?

Don't be stupid. That doesn't count, it only matters where those teams where when they got beat.

But for other teams it will matter just not for Boise. If SC wins the SEC, well Bama lost to the SECzzz speeddzz champions, so its okay that they are ranked higher as a 1 loss team then the undefeated teams.

yodabear
10-11-2010, 08:40 PM
There is no way in Hell Boise State and TCU play each other in the NC. I'll chop off my balls. Now, under the right circumstances I wanna see one of them get a shot at the power in the NC, but like some1 else said, even if Boise is #1 right away...Ohio State plays Iowa and Michigan, a SEC team goes undefeated. Oregon keep it going, and Boise will fall no matter what.

P-L
10-11-2010, 09:37 PM
The ignorance in regards to this subject is just mind-boggling. I keep hearing excuses, excuses, and more excuses but no solutions to the problem. It's too easy just to keep spouting off "OMG!!! They only play two good teamzz. They suck. LOL!!!" without actually putting any thought into what you're saying.

If Boise wants a national title they're gonna have to do more then play the schedule they do. I don't want to hear how it's not their fault who they play, because it's no one elses job to get them a schedule.
Do you know how college football scheduling works? YOU CAN'T PUT A TEAM ON YOUR SCHEDULE IF THEY DON'T WANT TO SCHEDULE YOU. So yeah, it kind of is other teams' jobs to get them a tougher schedule. You think Alabama is begging Boise for a game but the Broncos said "Nah, we'll schedule Toledo instead"? In case you missed it Boise State just joined a conference starting next year featuring four other very solid teams just to watch two of those teams get up and leave the conference immediately after. Please explain to me a realistic way for Boise State to strengthen it's schedule. If you know how they can, and it sounds like you do, I would like to know. Gene Bleymaier is dying to know as well.

Note to top teams:
Stop playing good teams. Schedule two mediocre ones at best, barely win, play powder puff conference teams and play for a NC.
Good message to send.
Win all of your games? Too ******* bad your not going to the National Championship game. We like this team who didn't win all of their games better.

Much better message to send.

Notredameleo
10-11-2010, 09:56 PM
I would much rather see a Boise State/TCU championship game than a LSU/Auburn or Ohio State/LSU championship game. For two reasons, 1: I like both teams, and they have earned their shot. 2: When the NCAA and the conferences start losing money, maybe they will understand that the BCS is garbage!

wonderbredd24
10-11-2010, 10:07 PM
How weak are TCU and Boise State's schedules really?

The Big East gets an automatic BCS bid and the only team in the Top 25 is West Virginia... at 25.

The ACC gets an automatic BCS bid and the only team in the Top 25 is Florida State... at 16.

The Mountain West has #4 TCU, #11 Utah, and #23 Air Force while the WAC has #3 Boise State #19 Nevada and the Broncos and Horned Frogs played better OOC schedules than anyone else in contention for the National Title. I just don't see how you keep them out over a 1-loss team from the SEC or anywhere else. It's just ridiculous.

Shane P. Hallam
10-11-2010, 10:30 PM
How weak are TCU and Boise State's schedules really?

The Big East gets an automatic BCS bid and the only team in the Top 25 is West Virginia... at 25.

The ACC gets an automatic BCS bid and the only team in the Top 25 is Florida State... at 16.

The Mountain West has #4 TCU, #11 Utah, and #23 Air Force while the WAC has #3 Boise State #19 Nevada and the Broncos and Horned Frogs played better OOC schedules than anyone else in contention for the National Title. I just don't see how you keep them out over a 1-loss team from the SEC or anywhere else. It's just ridiculous.

That's fine, but we aren't talking about BCS. We are talking about national title which Big East/ACC aren't touching. I've never said it is Boise's fault, it is the BCS' fault, but if you aren't in the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12, you aren't going to sniff the national title unless there is less than two undefeated teams from those conferences.

Shane P. Hallam
10-11-2010, 10:33 PM
I would much rather see a Boise State/TCU championship game than a LSU/Auburn or Ohio State/LSU championship game. For two reasons, 1: I like both teams, and they have earned their shot. 2: When the NCAA and the conferences start losing money, maybe they will understand that the BCS is garbage!

Boise/TCU's Bowl game last year was one of the lowest rated Bowl games in history. It was down 21 percent from the year before for the Fiesta Bowl. Right near it? The Boise/Oklahoma game. The NCAA makes money by keeping TCU and Boise out of big games. Sad, but true. We all will watch no matter what, the casual fan won't. That won't help change the system.

JoeJoeBrown
10-11-2010, 10:36 PM
The ignorance in regards to this subject is just mind-boggling.

Do you know how college football scheduling works? YOU CAN'T PUT A TEAM ON YOUR SCHEDULE IF THEY DON'T WANT TO SCHEDULE YOU. So yeah, it kind of is other teams' jobs to get them a tougher schedule.

You do realize that Boise (yes, podunk Boise) demands $1M to play an away game without a return visit. That is insane. What big school is going to do that? Schedule a decent team and pay them so you don't have to play on their podunk blue field?

Former podunk teams didn't pop up over night. FSU took all comers. Virginia Tech as well. Ransoming the big boys isn't the way to do it.

steelernation77
10-11-2010, 11:12 PM
The ignorance in regards to this subject is just mind-boggling. I keep hearing excuses, excuses, and more excuses but no solutions to the problem. It's too easy just to keep spouting off "OMG!!! They only play two good teamzz. They suck. LOL!!!" without actually putting any thought into what you're saying.


Do you know how college football scheduling works? YOU CAN'T PUT A TEAM ON YOUR SCHEDULE IF THEY DON'T WANT TO SCHEDULE YOU. So yeah, it kind of is other teams' jobs to get them a tougher schedule. You think Alabama is begging Boise for a game but the Broncos said "Nah, we'll schedule Toledo instead"? In case you missed it Boise State just joined a conference starting next year featuring four other very solid teams just to watch two of those teams get up and leave the conference immediately after. Please explain to me a realistic way for Boise State to strengthen it's schedule. If you know how they can, and it sounds like you do, I would like to know. Gene Bleymaier is dying to know as well.


Win all of your games? Too ******* bad your not going to the National Championship game. We like this team who didn't win all of their games better.

Much better message to send.

Teams in BCS conferences don't schedule Boise because their conference schedules are tough enough that that they don't need an OOC victory over Boise State.

In a BCS conference teams have to prep every single week like the team they're playing has a legitimate chance to beat them because they usually do. They have to play their starters the entire game. The rigors of the schedule demand that they have depth.

Boise plays opponents that are so bad it can pretty much just show up and win. Most of its games are over with at the half.

I'm sorry that Boise isn't in a BCS conference but the fact is that it is isn't. It is much easier for Boise to go undefeated than it would be for any other BCS conference team. If Boise wants to get in to a NC game, get in a BCS conference. Otherwise, tough luck.

Now of course this is all under the BCS system. If Boise were to get a to a NC game via a playoff system, then they would obviously deserve to be there.

Smooth Criminal
10-11-2010, 11:41 PM
Id be all for a Boise or tcu team in a national championship, if they deserve it. Them getting in over an undefeated SEC, big 10, or Big 12 team as suggested in this thread is ********.

If they're the only ones left, sure they can play for it. But if not, they definitely shouldn't get in over a team that plays tougher competition.

Smooth Criminal
10-11-2010, 11:45 PM
Do you know how college football scheduling works? YOU CAN'T PUT A TEAM ON YOUR SCHEDULE IF THEY DON'T WANT TO SCHEDULE YOU. So yeah, it kind of is other teams' jobs to get them a tougher schedule. You think Alabama is begging Boise for a game but the Broncos said "Nah, we'll schedule Toledo instead"? In case you missed it Boise State just joined a conference starting next year featuring four other very solid teams just to watch two of those teams get up and leave the conference immediately after. Please explain to me a realistic way for Boise State to strengthen it's schedule. If you know how they can, and it sounds like you do, I would like to know. Gene Bleymaier is dying to know as well.




I don't have a solution for Boise, but its not my problem, or the other teams in the nations problem to solve. Only Boise is responsible for the schedule they play. They have to find a way to improve it if they want to get in over teams that play much stronger schedules. I've said on here the move to the MWC is a positive step for Boise, but with teams leaving that conference they're still going to have to find a way to schedule a stronger ooc schedule then most teams to make up for weaker conference play.

But I guess you're right since you used all caps.

brat316
10-12-2010, 12:03 AM
Id be all for a Boise or tcu team in a national championship, if they deserve it. Them getting in over an undefeated SEC, big 10, or Big 12 team as suggested in this thread is ********.

If they're the only ones left, sure they can play for it. But if not, they definitely shouldn't get in over a team that plays tougher competition.

So your fine with them getting in over 1 loss say Bama team? Or undefeated Pac-10 team?

crites09
10-12-2010, 12:14 AM
You are joking, right? An undefeated SEC team doesn't go over Boise? An undefeated Big 12 team? You can say it is overrated, but it sure counts.

All you can ask is do you honestly think Boise would go undefeated in the SEC.. I think the answer is no. If there is an undefeated team in any of the major conferences I think that will be the question at hand... Could Boise or TCU go undefeated in those conferences... Yea they play in these games and get wins but they prepare for them like none other.

I agree with Shane that it counts for a lot.

If anything I just see as them trying to give Boise some love before they break their hearts when they don't get in the NC

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 12:39 AM
yes, that podunk little #3 overall team. but i bet if you say 'podunk' a few more times, it might actually come true and will sound less, well, childish.

Your arrogance and continuous ranting are, well, childish. But most of us are adults wasting time talking about a game that a bunch of kids play, so I guess we are, well, all, a bit, childish (superfluous commas for extra pomposity).

I do agree that it's about money. Why should the big schools and the big conferences give the little guys everything that they want?

The point stands that it takes many years to develop a brand, many dollars to develop a sports program, and a lot of dedicated people to elevate a program to a national level. When other teams of similar ilk (i.e. FSU and VT) were barnstorming the nation, they weren't making ridiculous demands. They played anyone, anywhere. Now they are a part of the club.

BSU looks to be a team just like those guys. But the ridiculous home/home requirement is too much. The big boys see that as a lose/lose. Tough non-BCS team that wants a home/home in their tiny stadium with a blue field? Either that or pay $1M for the privilege to play them? Not happening very often unless someone like ESPN would make the deal extra sweet for the large school.

WRT the BCS, the system is severely flawed. It's rigged for traditional powers, obviously. A playoff would be the ideal way to determine a champion, and hopefully we all see it before we die.

The thing is, most non-BCS schools flat out suck at football and have no business being in the same system. I mean, there are also quite a few BCS schools that flat out suck at football. It's an expensive, difficult sport. Forcing the top schools to play each other more is appealing.

Leaving an avenue for the non-BCS schools in a playoff future is a must as well. I think it will happen.

Also, I'd like to wipe out the Big East. They are almost all playing MAC level football now.

steelernation77
10-12-2010, 12:44 AM
yes, just ask the ACC/Big East. or let's stop pretending like "BCS conferences" has anything to do with it.



yes, no doubt nebraska preps all week for that huge game with CU right before the big 12 championship. meanwhile, boise couldn't care less before playing nevada. i know TCU won't prep at all for utah. or air force. total gimmes.



which is, of course, why OSU schedules ohio, marshall and eastern michigan for half of it's season. so it can rest up for big games like illinois, indiana, penn state and minnesota.

oregon? i can only imagine the strain of playing new mexico, and portland state in preparation for a really tough matchup against washington state, UCLA, arizona state, or washington. they must have had nightmares about portland state.



the only relevant points thus far regarding TCU and boise are jbond's. the only reason these teams will never, ever play in the NC is money. i can't imagine the BCS letting them in over two loss teams if they could find any way to avoid it. which is pathetic. football fans should be ashamed of themselves.

First, a general point. The practice of going through and separating a argument in the way that is so popular on this site is a lame one. Arguments should be refuted in their entirety.

You use the exceptions on Boise State and TCU's schedule to argue that it is strong and the exceptions on BCS conference schedules to argue they are weak. This is a poor argument.

Teams in BCS conferences will face more consistent challenges throughout the season, making it harder to go undefeated. This is irrefutable.

RaiderNation
10-12-2010, 12:49 AM
Boise State vs Auburn/Oregon in the NC game

You heard it here first

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 12:51 AM
First, a general point. The practice of going through and separating a argument in the way that is so popular on this site is a lame one. Arguments should be refuted in their entirety.

You use the exceptions on Boise State and TCU's schedule to argue that it is strong and the exceptions on BCS conference schedules to argue they are weak. This is a poor argument.

Teams in BCS conferences will face more consistent challenges throughout the season, making it harder to go undefeated. This is irrefutable.

Well put.

Especially that last point. The numbers don't lie.

niel89
10-12-2010, 02:22 AM
Just give me a 8 game playoff or something like that. That way if there are a couple of these undefeated teams (like Boise and TCU) from non BCS leagues they have a chance to prove and compare themselves against the BCS conference schools in an actual games. If it is just a bad team that went undefeated against a terrible league, then they probably won't be in that top 8 ranking.


What is the major counter point from a fans perspective on a limited playoff system?

I know for the people who make money that they just don't want to lose all that cash from the individual bowl games.

Shane P. Hallam
10-12-2010, 07:38 AM
my arrogance and ranting? http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-rolleyes007.gif



fully agree with almost all of this. i wouldn't expect, say, alabama to schedule BSU for that cost or out of the goodness of its heart. and i get why they don't want the home/home. though i'd add that, for a lot of these teams, i think there's an element of fear at this point. nothing worse than agreeing to play BSU or TCU then actually losing to them.

Perhaps, but Oregon and Virginia Tech have played Boise. Sure, they aren't OSU, Texas, USC, Oklahoma, Bama, or Florida, but they have been consistent top teams in their conferences. And when given the choice for say Ohio State to go with Miami (FL) or Boise or to go with Oklahoma or Boise, it is an obvious choice. Alabama isn't going to choose to play Boise over Penn State for their big OOC game. The system doesn't really favor big time OOC games, but many of these top teams do it or are trying to do it, Boise included. If the reward was actually there for beating a Top 25 team, any top 25 team, then teams would leap to schedule a TCU or Boise. The fact is, Alabama gets more credit for beating a mediocre Penn State team than had they scheduled Boise and won. That's the system.

It isn't Boise's fault they aren't getting into the National Title, but that doesn't mean they SHOULD compete for the National Title.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 07:43 AM
That's fine, but we aren't talking about BCS. We are talking about national title which Big East/ACC aren't touching. I've never said it is Boise's fault, it is the BCS' fault, but if you aren't in the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12, you aren't going to sniff the national title unless there is less than two undefeated teams from those conferences.

If an ACC or Big East team were undefeated, would they be getting anywhere near the amount of grief about their schedules? The answer is absolutely not. They would be in line behind an SEC, Big XII, or Big 10 team, but there wouldn't be any crap about a 1-loss team going to the National Title over them, which is what this discussion is coming down to.

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 08:21 AM
my arrogance and ranting? http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-rolleyes007.gif


:) I'm facetious dork. Sorry.


fully agree with almost all of this. i wouldn't expect, say, alabama to schedule BSU for that cost or out of the goodness of its heart. and i get why they don't want the home/home. though i'd add that, for a lot of these teams, i think there's an element of fear at this point. nothing worse than agreeing to play BSU or TCU then actually losing to them.

It's sad that it's come down to this. This is almost solely the cause of the BCS and it's ridiculous formula. W-L record reigns supreme, as do the biased, reactionary voting of coaches.

The system needs to start rewarding difficult schedules more. That is a nice temporary fix.

Shane P. Hallam
10-12-2010, 08:40 AM
If an ACC or Big East team were undefeated, would they be getting anywhere near the amount of grief about their schedules? The answer is absolutely not. They would be in line behind an SEC, Big XII, or Big 10 team, but there wouldn't be any crap about a 1-loss team going to the National Title over them, which is what this discussion is coming down to.

I will slightly disagree with that. I think a Big East team would get some grief about their schedule. I don't think and undefeated UConn team would make the national title game TBH. Beating Michigan and Vanderbilt as their OOC and a weak Big East? They would have still been behind Boise.

Giantsfan1080
10-12-2010, 09:44 AM
The Big East this year would take tons of grief for having an undefeated team sniff the NC game. It's the worst I've seen the Big East ever. Hell even the year where WV, Louisville, and Rutgers were all Top 10 teams they were getting grief and had people saying they shouldnt go to a NC game. All those teams ended up losing at least once but people had their pitchforks ready to go.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 10:25 AM
So your fine with them getting in over 1 loss say Bama team? Or undefeated Pac-10 team?

Over 1 loss bama, I'd accept but prefer Bame. While I think a 1 loss Bama is so much more impressive then an undefeated Boise, Bama could have won all their games. I wouldn't feel too bad for any team with a loss missing the game.

An undefeated PAC 10 team definitely should get in over Boise or TCU.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 10:33 AM
Can you imagine what would have been said had Cincy played for the national title say if Texas lost the Big 12 title game?

People hate the Big Easts weak schedule just as much as Boises. That said, Boises is even worse then a Big East schedule.

bustabinary
10-12-2010, 11:17 AM
Can you imagine what would have been said had Cincy played for the national title say if Texas lost the Big 12 title game?
Cincy was actually #2 in the computer polls at the end of last season... it wouldn't have been that farfetched to see Cincy over undefeated Texas.

brat316
10-12-2010, 12:06 PM
So I just read this on Espn.com. Computer rankings takes out all the emotional toll that it has on voters.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5675517

Boise continued to lose ground to Ohio State and Oregon in the USA Today poll. The Broncos slipped from 101 points behind the Buckeyes to 120 behind, and from 24 points behind the Ducks to 53 behind.

TCU suffered the same indignity. It slipped from 190 points behind Ohio State to 242 behind, and from 113 points behind the Ducks to 175 points behind.

Based on what, you ask? Here's what:

Oregon beat Washington State by 20.

Ohio State beat Indiana by 28.

Boise beat Toledo by 43.

TCU beat Wyoming by 45.

Average computer rankings for those four, as of this week: Toledo 57.2, Wyoming 68, Indiana 83.2, Washington State 94.8.

Also another funny thing.

Oregon State (13). The Beavers have played an incredible schedule to date -- at Boise, at TCU, at Arizona. They lost the first two in respectable fashion, by a combined 22 points. They beat then-No. 9 Arizona on Saturday. Their reward? No ranking, and fewer votes than a Texas team that has been a flaming disappointment so far.

brat316
10-12-2010, 12:09 PM
Can you imagine what would have been said had Cincy played for the national title say if Texas lost the Big 12 title game?

People hate the Big Easts weak schedule just as much as Boises. That said, Boises is even worse then a Big East schedule.

Hey if you loose the title game you loose. Florida lost to Bama in the title game or else Florida could have made the argument that if a 1 loss Texas can play them why can't Florida?

brat316
10-12-2010, 12:12 PM
:) I'm facetious dork. Sorry.



It's sad that it's come down to this. This is almost solely the cause of the BCS and it's ridiculous formula. W-L record reigns supreme, as do the biased, reactionary voting of coaches.

The system needs to start rewarding difficult schedules more. That is a nice temporary fix.

They had that, remember the computer rankings, that got phased out becuase of USC "emotional" victory. It had the AP in a roar, blah blah bunch of stuff happened and USC went instead of Auburn.

Shane P. Hallam
10-12-2010, 01:20 PM
Hey if you loose the title game you loose. Florida lost to Bama in the title game or else Florida could have made the argument that if a 1 loss Texas can play them why can't Florida?

I'm not Sniper or anything, but I have to correct it to lose.

brat316
10-12-2010, 01:44 PM
I'm not Sniper or anything, but I have to correct it to lose.

ahha, i know which one to write its lose, but I always end up writing loose. Whatever Texas and Florida are both loose, or else they would have tight balls and win right now.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 02:13 PM
Can you imagine what would have been said had Cincy played for the national title say if Texas lost the Big 12 title game?

People hate the Big Easts weak schedule just as much as Boises. That said, Boises is even worse then a Big East schedule.
A. Cincinnati had a quality schedule last year.
B. Boise State's schedule is not worst than a Big East school.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 02:33 PM
It definitely is. I think you're underrating just how pathetic Boises conference schedule is. Outside of Fresno St and Nevada, who Id say are overrated, they play no one. Teams in the Big East are certainly better as a whole then the WAC.

Add to it that WVU has faced LSU, Pitt has played Utah and Miami, Cincy played Oklahoma, the Big East teams are doing better ooc then Boise.

Not that it matters, no Big East team is going undefeated because they got killed in all those ooc games.

Boises conference schedule definitely does not equal a Big East conference schedule even. The teams in the WAC, outside Boise who is very good, and Fresno and Nevada who I think are overrated but still good, are not as good as the teams in the Big East.

SickwithIt1010
10-12-2010, 02:36 PM
It definitely is. I think you're underrating just how pathetic Boises conference schedule is. Outside of Fresno St and Nevada, who Id say are overrated, they play no one. Teams in the Big East are certainly better as a whole then the WAC.

Add to it that WVU has faced LSU, Pitt has played Utah and Miami, Cincy played Oklahoma, the Big East teams are doing better ooc then Boise.

Not that it matters, no Big East team is going undefeated because they got killed in all those ooc games.

Youre so full of **** its not even funny, Cinci is the ONLY that actually has a better SOS than BSU....

....they are 15th.....and there isnt another team from the Big East in the top 50.

Please dont make me read posts that make something that will do nothing but just waste my time.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 02:37 PM
http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-09/big-east/2009-cincinnati-bearcats-football-schedule.php

And this is a quality schedule? Playing the Big East and toughest out of conference being Oregon State isn't what I would call quality. Definitely not quality that people here would have accepted them over Texas.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 02:39 PM
Youre so full of **** its not even funny, Cinci is the ONLY that actually has a better SOS than BSU....

....they are 15th.....and there isnt another team from the Big East in the top 50.

Please dont make me read posts that make something that will do nothing but just waste my time.

Yea, as of now that's where the SOS is. Wait till the end of the year and see where it's at, you know, when teams play their conference schedules.

O thats right, Boises schedule gets easier when they move to conference play. While teams in the Big Ten and SEC and other conferences are just getting to the strength of their schedule.

Boises conference schedule is so pathetic that it will bring them down. Playing teams like Toledo definitely isn't going to keep SOS ranked very high for long.

SickwithIt1010
10-12-2010, 02:43 PM
Yea, as of now that's where the SOS is. Wait till the end of the year and see where it's at, you know, when teams play their conference schedules.

O thats right, Boises and cinches schedules get easier when they move to conference play. While teams in the Big Ten and SEC and other conferences are just getting to the strength of their schedule.

Boises conference schedule is so pathetic that it will bring them down. Playing teams like Toledo definitely isn't going to keep SOS ranked very high for long.

What you just said made your argument ****, you just told me that a Big East schedule is harder.

Cinci is the only one ahead of BSU as far as SOS, so if BSU's and the Big East's schedules get weaker as the year goes along, Cinci is still the ONLY Big east team with a harder SOS.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 02:49 PM
What you just said made your argument ****, you just told me that a Big East schedule is harder.

Cinci is the only one ahead of BSU as far as SOS, so if BSU's and the Big East's schedules get weaker as the year goes along, Cinci is still the ONLY Big east team with a harder SOS.
And that's because Oklahoma was willing to play them...

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 02:49 PM
What you just said made your argument ****, you just told me that a Big East schedule is harder.

Cinci is the only one ahead of BSU as far as SOS, so if BSU's and the Big East's schedules get weaker as the year goes along, Cinci is still the ONLY Big east team with a harder SOS.

Boises conference is weaker then the Big East. While Cincys will go down, it's not going to plummet like Boises will after playing New Mexico St, Toledo, San Jose St, and Louisiana Tech in consecutive weeks.

They played similar ooc schedules, Boises slightly stronger in my opinion, but Boises conference schedule is just too pathetic to ignore.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 02:53 PM
And that's because Oklahoma was willing to play them...

And if Boise didn't have ridiculous demands people would play them too.

Don't fall into the "well play anyone anywhere trap." Thats the product of some PR firm they hired to convince the nation they deserve it. They played Virginia Tech at. "neutral" site in order to have VT avoid paying their ridiculous demands.

While Boise is actually demanding a $1 million dollar payment to go to a game and not have it returned. That's ridiculous.

Not to mention that teams have their schedules made up years in advance, so Boise cant just show up and think people will be willing to drop their plans and add Boise at the last second.

Boises schedule is only the fault of Boise. Its no one elses job to get them a tough schedule. If they wanna play the weak schedule and hope no one else goes undefeated that's all fine with me, but then they can't ***** when undefeated teams from real conferences hop them in the rankings.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 02:56 PM
http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-09/big-east/2009-cincinnati-bearcats-football-schedule.php

And this is a quality schedule? Playing the Big East and toughest out of conference being Oregon State isn't what I would call quality. Definitely not quality that people here would have accepted them over Texas.
You should really stop talking on this subject as you have no idea what you're talking about.

The Big East had several extremely tough teams last year like Pittsburgh, West Virginia, and UConn.

And Oregon State played everyone extremely tough aside from their Bowl game.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 02:58 PM
And if Boise didn't have ridiculous demands people would play them too.

Don't fall into the "well play anyone anywhere trap." Thats the product of some PR firm they hired to convince the nation they deserve it. They played Virginia Tech at. "neutral" site in order to have VT avoid paying their ridiculous demands.

While Boise is actually demanding a $1 million dollar payment to go to a game and not have it returned. That's ridiculous.

Not to mention that teams have their schedules made up years in advance, so Boise cant just show up and think people will be willing to drop their plans and add Boise at the last second.

Boises schedule is only the fault of Boise. Its no one elses job to get them a tough schedule. If they wanna play the weak schedule and hope no one else goes undefeated that's all fine with me, but then they can't ***** when undefeated teams from real conferences hop them in the rankings.
They played similar ooc schedules, Boises slightly stronger in my opinion, but Boises conference schedule is just too pathetic to ignore.
Their OOC schedule this year has been more than difficult enough. You're disqualifying them based on their Conference Schedule, so everything you're posting here is irrelevant.

Pick an argument and stick with it.

SickwithIt1010
10-12-2010, 03:00 PM
And if Boise didn't have ridiculous demands people would play them too.

Don't fall into the "well play anyone anywhere trap." Thats the product of some PR firm they hired to convince the nation they deserve it. They played Virginia Tech at. "neutral" site in order to have VT avoid paying their ridiculous demands.

While Boise is actually demanding a $1 million dollar payment to go to a game and not have it returned. That's ridiculous.

Not to mention that teams have their schedules made up years in advance, so Boise cant just show up and think people will be willing to drop their plans and add Boise at the last second.

Boises schedule is only the fault of Boise. Its no one elses job to get them a tough schedule. If they wanna play the weak schedule and hope no one else goes undefeated that's all fine with me, but then they can't ***** when undefeated teams from real conferences hop them in the rankings.

I believe its alot more about tougher teams being scared of playing a team like boise state than it is about the money. Money like that is nothing to the top names in college football.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:02 PM
You should really stop talking on this subject as you have no idea what you're talking about.

The Big East had several extremely tough teams last year like Pittsburgh, West Virginia, and UConn.

And Oregon State played everyone extremely tough aside from their Bowl game.

The Big East doesn't have "extremely tough" teams. Those "extremely tough teams" would have gotten destroyed in a conference like the Big Ten, Big 12, or SEC.

And by played everyone extremely tough, you mean lost 4 games, then their bowl game. Close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 03:06 PM
The Big East doesn't have "extremely tough" teams. Those "extremely tough teams" would have gotten destroyed in a conference like the Big Ten, Big 12, or SEC.

And by played everyone extremely tough, you mean lost 4 games, then their bowl game. Close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades.
Because?

Why even have any other conference other than the Big Ten, Big XII, SEC, and PAC 10?

Evidently, they should have the big boy championship with those 4 conferences and then another championship with the rest of the FBS.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:06 PM
I believe its alot more about tougher teams being scared of playing a team like boise state than it is about the money. Money like that is nothing to the top names in college football.

Why would a team pay a good Boise team to come in while they can pay a lesser team, say in OSUs case, Ohio U or Marshall, less money to come in, and it costs us nothing because the stadium is still a sell out, the city is still packed, and the tv ratings don't get boosted much at all by playing Boise.

Teams with real conferences don't need to play Boise to improve their schedule. Boise needs to play them. So they really arnt in any place to be demanding cash to play a team. If Boise wants to play them, they need to find a way to make it benefit the other team, not cost them money.

Best thing to remember, it's always about the money.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 03:09 PM
Why would a team pay a good Boise team to come in while they can pay a lesser team, say in OSUs case, Ohio U or Marshall, less money to come in, and it costs us nothing because the stadium is still a sell out, the city is still packed, and the tv ratings don't get boosted much at all by playing Boise.

Teams with real conferences don't need to play Boise to improve their schedule. Boise needs to play them. So they really arnt in any place to be demanding cash to play a team. If Boise wants to play them, they need to find a way to make it benefit the other team, not cost them money.

Best thing to remember, it's always about the money.
Interesting... so Boise State-Ohio State on ABC or ESPN wouldn't get much of a boost in ratings over Ohio State-Ohio or Ohio State-Marshall on the Big Ten Network?

Sure you wanna go with that?

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:09 PM
Because?

Why even have any other conference other than the Big Ten, Big XII, SEC, and PAC 10?

Evidently, they should have the big boy championship with those 4 conferences and then another championship with the rest of the FBS.

Because it's what would happen. You really think a team from the Big East would survive the conference schedules of any of those conferences without 3 or 4 losses. If you do, we simply disagree.

And evidently, there already is a Big Boy Championship. As long as 2 teams from those 4 conferences go undefeated every year, no other school stands a chance.

SickwithIt1010
10-12-2010, 03:12 PM
Interesting... so Boise State-Ohio State on ABC or ESPN wouldn't get much of a boost in ratings over Ohio State-Ohio or Ohio State-Marshall on the Big Ten Network?

Sure you wanna go with that?

id like to see what he says to this...

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:13 PM
Interesting... so Boise State-Ohio State on ABC or ESPN wouldn't get much of a boost in ratings over Ohio State-Ohio or Ohio State-Marshall on the Big Ten Network?

Sure you wanna go with that?

It would naturally, but don't pretend Boises ratings are great. If it had to compete with another decent game, it would definitely lose.

Virginia Tech game was different because it was the only game on at the time. Definitely a smart move.

And the Big Ten makes a ton of money getting those games on their network. Thats why Big Ten teams makes more money per school then any other conference.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:14 PM
And I think were getting way off my only point in this thread, that Boise doesn't deserve to play in a title game over an undefeated team from a real conference.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 03:15 PM
It would naturally, but don't pretend Boises ratings are great. If it had to compete with another decent game, it would definitely lose.

Virginia Tech game was different because it was the only game on at the time. Definitely a smart move.

And the Big Ten makes a ton of money getting those games on their network. Thats why Big Ten teams makes more money per school then any other conference.
The BTN's profitability has nothing to do with an individual games' TV ratings.

What game would #1 Ohio State-#3 Boise State lose to in terms of ratings this season?

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 03:18 PM
And I think were getting way off my only point in this thread, that Boise doesn't deserve to play in a title game over an undefeated team from a real conference.
And that's because they reportedly demand too much money to play anyone on the part of the schedule they can control even though you already admitted their OOC was satisfactory this year.

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 03:19 PM
Still of large note wrt BSU's schedule issues is that they have turned down both a 2 and 1 deal offer by Nebraska and Texas.

Anyone, anywhere (except the good teams).

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:20 PM
The BTN's profitability has nothing to do with an individual games' TV ratings.

What game would #1 Ohio State-#3 Boise State lose to in terms of ratings this season?

Well now that Ohio State is 1 and Boise is 3 it would do well, but that wouldn't have been they case when they actually played cause OSU only has conference games left.

But sure, it would do very well. I honestly dont think it would make Ohio State much more money, I think the network would benefit more then either of the schools. And the Big Tens profitability has everything to do wihh the ratings because Ohio State gets many millions every year from the BTNs profitability.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 03:21 PM
Well now that Ohio State is 1 and Boise is 3 it would do well, but that wouldn't have been they case when they actually played cause OSU only has conference games left.

But sure, it would do very well. I honestly dont think it would make Ohio State much more money, I think the network would benefit more then either of the schools. And the Big Tens profitability has everything to do wihh the ratings because Ohio State gets many millions every year from the BTNs profitability.
Every school in the Big Ten gets $22 million per year from their TV deal.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 03:23 PM
Here's my question... what OOC would be good enough to allow Boise State to play in the National Title game? Where's the line?

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:24 PM
And that's because they reportedly demand too much money to play anyone on the part of the schedule they can control even though you already admitted their OOC was satisfactory this year.

Yes, their out of conference was satisfactory this year. But satisfactory simply isn't good enough for a team like Boise, that plays a pathetic conference schedule.

They had to have a ridiculous out of conference schedule to boost their sos enough to compete with the real conferences.

I'm all for Boise playing for the title, as long as they don't get handed the soot over a team that deserves it more. The BCS wont let that happen, so I don't know why I give a damn.

LizardState
10-12-2010, 03:27 PM
Yes, their out of conference was satisfactory this year. But satisfactory simply isn't good enough for a team like Boise, that plays a pathetic conference schedule.

Hear, hear, more of this, smoothy.

I would love to see college FB's flavor of the month boutique team play an SEC team not named Vandy or in the state of Mississippi away from their weird blue field.

Or a Pac 10 team not from the state of Washington. Half their team is from CA anyway.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 03:28 PM
Hear, hear, more of this, smoothy.

I would love to see college FB's flavor of the month boutique team play an SEC team not named Vandy or in the state of Mississippi away from their weird blue field.
So your Alabama Crimson Tide getting monkey stomped by 3 TDs by the Utes didn't convince you Boise State could beat a decent SEC team? Seriously?

Or a Pac 10 team not from the state of Washington. Half their team is from CA anyway.
Like both teams from Oregon?

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:29 PM
Here's my question... what OOC would be good enough to allow Boise State to play in the National Title game? Where's the line?

Hard to say. If they're one of only 2 undefeated teams left, what they have now is fine.

If they're 3, they'd have to have the schedule to hop them. It's gonna be different for every team, all depending on whose left undefeated.

Shane P. Hallam
10-12-2010, 03:30 PM
This thread is why the BCS works and is here to stay. Because it creates ALL this discussion and promotion of their product. If there was a playoff, no one would care, we all would know Boise would be in the playoff and be done with it.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:30 PM
So your Alabama Crimson Tide getting monkey stomped by 3 TDs by the Utes didn't convince you Boise State could beat a decent SEC team? Seriously?


Like both teams from Oregon?

I dont think Boise can't compete, I think they're a really talented team. I just don't think they should be in the title game over teams that have done more to earn the spot.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 03:32 PM
This thread is why the BCS works and is here to stay. Because it creates ALL this discussion and promotion of their product. If there was a playoff, no one would care, we all would know Boise would be in the playoff and be done with it.

I have always kind of agreed with that, but the BCS isn't making money off this message board, and I can't believe a playoff wouldn't draw amazing amounts of attention and money.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 03:35 PM
This thread is why the BCS works and is here to stay. Because it creates ALL this discussion and promotion of their product. If there was a playoff, no one would care, we all would know Boise would be in the playoff and be done with it.
No one cares about playoffs.

The NFL, NCAA basketball tournament, NBA, MLB? All barely hanging on. Deciding who their champion is on the field and people being happy with that result? Passe.

Eleventy billion people watching the Superbowl is definitely not as good as people discussing college football's system of picking a champion. Because discussion moves product and sells air time.

Edit: And the BCS may be boned and it has nothing to do with fans, coaches, players, or anything else you'd think of... it may be boned due to our good friends at the IRS. Only the Rose Bowl is on the level with how they operate.

SickwithIt1010
10-12-2010, 03:36 PM
Still of large note wrt BSU's schedule issues is that they have turned down both a 2 and 1 deal offer by Nebraska and Texas.

Anyone, anywhere (except the good teams).

link please?

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 03:51 PM
link please?

Nebraska (http://huskerextra.com/sports/football/article_889b87bc-1985-59e4-af2b-7c509472be21.html)

I've seen comments about UT, but a quick search yielded nothing.

LizardState
10-12-2010, 03:53 PM
So your Alabama Crimson Tide getting monkey stomped by 3 TDs by the Utes didn't convince you Boise State could beat a decent SEC team? Seriously?

Relevance, seriously? Utah >>>>>>>>>>>> Boise St.

Or how about your Ohio St. Luckeyes, think they would monkey stomp them?

No one cares about playoffs.

No one? Only about 75-80% of fans polled in every yr. I've seen a poll, + heavyweight FBS/BCS coaches, + the President of the US...... I could go on.

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 04:03 PM
Or how about your Ohio St. Luckeyes, think they would monkey stomp them?



The OSU defensive front seven would overwhelm their offense.

And "Luckeyes"? Really? You do very well at furthering the perception that the rest of the nation has of the residents of the state of Alabama.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 04:03 PM
Relevance, seriously? Utah >>>>>>>>>>>> Boise St.
Boise State managed to beat the best of the Mountain West in TCU last year without the blue turf. I don't see why they couldn't beat Utah.

Or how about your Ohio St. Luckeyes, think they would monkey stomp them?
I'd love to find out. What we do know is Alabama got destroyed.

No one? Only about 75-80% of fans polled in every yr. I've seen a poll, + heavyweight FBS/BCS coaches, + the President of the US...... I could go on.
Hi, I'm obvious sarcasm. Have we met?

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 04:04 PM
I'd love to join the boycott, but there's no way I could ever not watch a college football game.

So I'll just continue to support the broken system and ***** that someone needs to be done.

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 04:07 PM
strongly disagree. i have not and will continue to not watch a single BCS bowl game until the situation is resolved with a playoff of some kind. they won't get my tv money, and, where i can, i avoid buying products from the sponsors.

does my tiny contribution (or lack thereof) mean ****? of course not. but i refuse to support a product that's almost inarguably inferior for the consumer, no matter how much i may argue about it.

While flawed, it's still entertaining for the most part.

Perfection is difficult to achieve, and even a hardcore playoff will not yield the most optimal of results, as it rewards the teams that were playing the very best on one day.

Still, props on your convictions. The current solution is ridiculous, and empty. It's still a mythical national championship.

I mean it's so messed up that we can have a situation where MSU and OSU are both undefeated in the same conference (albeit this won't be an issue next season.)

RealityCheck
10-12-2010, 04:48 PM
get rid of this system then we wouldn't have to argue.
Exactly, we need playoffs.
Makes no sense taking place in a contest you can't win.

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 04:51 PM
i've been helped lately in that i haven't felt most of the top games were very good matchups (and because CU sucks, if we were any good i'd be hard pressed to not watch). but i just got fed up with it. it's so rare that the top two teams actually play, and it's so much about wringing every last dollar out of the process, instead of trying a process that could make exponentially more money if done properly. instead, we're talking about allowing teams with losing records into bowl games.

*shakes head*

Just remember that it's who controls the money, just not the magnitude of it. If a third party (say ESPN or Fox, etc...) comes up with a deal that is appealing to the major conference heads and the major schools involved, then we'll see a playoff.

I'm sure the power politics involved are interesting.

SickwithIt1010
10-12-2010, 04:56 PM
Relevance, seriously? Utah >>>>>>>>>>>> Boise St.



Youre ******* high.

BSU would mop Utah.

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 05:14 PM
Youre ******* high.

BSU would mop Utah.

I don't know about mop, but I do think that they'd win 8 times out of 10.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 05:28 PM
Boise is definitely a better team then Utah this year. Not that this has much to do withnthe Utah team that beat Bama.

brat316
10-12-2010, 06:55 PM
Because?

Why even have any other conference other than the Big Ten, Big XII, SEC, and PAC 10?

Evidently, they should have the big boy championship with those 4 conferences and then another championship with the rest of the FBS.


THIS.

I've been thinking about this for a while. Why not all the non-automatic teams get together and make their own stuff happen. Now the BIG Boys, won't be able to schedule cup cakes, without that super left out conferences asking for huge demands.

Sure they maybe a money problem to start but they gotta be smart and figure things out, make their own "BCS" so to speak. Then when the BCS gets pissed, and tries to stop them from doing it. BAM lawsuit for the new guys, for idk antitrust & monopolization of the championship. Also since the BCS won't have enough teams to fill out its 30 something bowls, they'll give in or some ****.

brat316
10-12-2010, 06:56 PM
Where the hell is everyone getting this BSU charges 1 million to play them? Only 1 school came out with that and it was Nebraska.

brat316
10-12-2010, 07:10 PM
Also that VT 'neutral' site wasn't much neutral seeing its on the east coast, pretty damn close to VT. VT controlled the video board, non of the Boise st players were shown in the lineup. Also VT band came out, but not the Boise horse.

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 07:18 PM
Where the hell is everyone getting this BSU charges 1 million to play them? Only 1 school came out with that and it was Nebraska.

Over-defensive about nothing much?

RealityCheck
10-12-2010, 07:29 PM
The BSU/TCU hate around here is just making me confused.

Teams who win all of their games aren't even allowed to play for the title? So what's the point of competing if you can't win?

brat316
10-12-2010, 07:33 PM
Over-defensive about nothing much?

ahaha, not really.

I'm just saying a few poster are using this argument. That in order to play Boise you need to pay them 1 million, they make it seem that Boise it trying to find a way to co-op out of playing big teams. That they are holding teams at a pirates' ransom. Lets get some facts together, 1 million for most big boys is nothing, compared to the revenue they gain from playing them.

Ohio St. has payed 2 million to Navy for a game, 1 million to CU.

But also that most schools that pay out that much are paying for a win pretty much and not to travel to the other teams site.

Yes, 1 million is a bit much for a potential loss.

JoeJoeBrown
10-12-2010, 08:05 PM
Yes, 1 million is a bit much for a potential loss.

Yep, that's the crux of it. And as mentioned earlier, they threw out the SOS directly (still there indirectly via polls) so teams are taking the Mack Brown approach to scheduling.

Very disappointing as a CFB fan.

Smooth Criminal
10-12-2010, 09:04 PM
The BSU/TCU hate around here is just making me confused.

Teams who win all of their games aren't even allowed to play for the title? So what's the point of competing if you can't win?

As long as they're the only undefeated teams left they can. But your right, it is competing, and teams in real conferences are doing more then Boise and TCU this year.

The end of the year is the only time we can judge who should go. We have to wait and see what teams are left undefeated.

Shane P. Hallam
10-12-2010, 10:15 PM
strongly disagree. i have not and will continue to not watch a single BCS bowl game until the situation is resolved with a playoff of some kind. they won't get my tv money, and, where i can, i avoid buying products from the sponsors.

does my tiny contribution (or lack thereof) mean ****? of course not. but i refuse to support a product that's almost inarguably inferior for the consumer, no matter how much i may argue about it.

That's fine, and going with what wonderbredd and everyone else is saying, everyone wants a playoff? People have to stop watching the product, and I don't just mean Bowl games, I mean everything. College Football's ratings are the highest ever the last few years. It is because people tune in to the big games each week since the loser is out. Alabama losing to USC wouldn't mean quite as much without it.

For better or worse, until college football DOES lose ratings because of no playoff, there won't be one.

Maybe this message board doesn't make the NCAA money, but this conversation in the media, at work places, at bars, it keeps people interested in college football and watching. THAT makes them money.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 10:23 PM
That's fine, and going with what wonderbredd and everyone else is saying, everyone wants a playoff? People have to stop watching the product, and I don't just mean Bowl games, I mean everything. College Football's ratings are the highest ever the last few years. It is because people tune in to the big games each week since the loser is out. Alabama losing to USC wouldn't mean quite as much without it.

For better or worse, until college football DOES lose ratings because of no playoff, there won't be one.

Maybe this message board doesn't make the NCAA money, but this conversation in the media, at work places, at bars, it keeps people interested in college football and watching. THAT makes them money.
With a playoff system, people would still watch all of this college football every week and teams would get to settle it on the field.

Shane P. Hallam
10-12-2010, 10:27 PM
With a playoff system, people would still watch all of this college football every week and teams would get to settle it on the field.

Would they? I don't watch college basketball regular season, even big time games because, quite frankly, I know those games are going to have a shot at it all. I'll see it in the tournament. Until ratings dip, BCS isn't changing. As a fan, I want a playoff, but this system works for the money.

wonderbredd24
10-12-2010, 10:37 PM
Would they? I don't watch college basketball regular season, even big time games because, quite frankly, I know those games are going to have a shot at it all. I'll see it in the tournament. Until ratings dip, BCS isn't changing. As a fan, I want a playoff, but this system works for the money.
Do you watch less NFL Football because of there being a playoff at the end?

Instead of merely being Double Jeopardy like they are now, Conference Championships would provide the opportunity for legitimate playoff berths.

So last year, the Nebraska-Texas winner would have gone to the playoffs instead of determining whether one or both teams went to BCS Bowls.

Personally, I think playoffs add more importance to more games, not less.

Shane P. Hallam
10-13-2010, 06:06 AM
Do you watch less NFL Football because of there being a playoff at the end?

Instead of merely being Double Jeopardy like they are now, Conference Championships would provide the opportunity for legitimate playoff berths.

So last year, the Nebraska-Texas winner would have gone to the playoffs instead of determining whether one or both teams went to BCS Bowls.

Personally, I think playoffs add more importance to more games, not less.

Sure I watch less NFL football because of a playoff. Colts games at the end of the past few years?

All I'm saying is, this system works for the NCAA and the numbers show it, the discussion shows it, and you can't ignore that all this Boise talk would not matter if there was a playoff.

Smooth Criminal
10-13-2010, 06:51 AM
The Boise talk wouldn't matter because they'd be in easily.

But there will always be bubble teams to talk about in a playoff. Even if we went to an 8 team playoff, sure we'd know the first few teams in, but no one would really clinch anything because 1 or 2 losses in college football is enough to keep you out of the playoffs. Not like we'd have a situation like we do with the Colts as you mentioned. Add to it that many teams play their biggest rivals in their last game.

Look at it this year. We'd have OSU, MSU, Oklahoma, Nebraska, LSU, Auburn, TCU, Boise, and Oregon all undefeated at this point and Bama at 1 loss. That's not even including potential for Utah and Nevada to run the table. There'd be plenty to talk about even if a playoff let 8 teams in.

Only problem would be auto bids. Most likely all the current BCS conferences would get an auto bid, which means potential for clinching early possible.

Point of all that is, I don't think adding a playoff would make the regular season much less important. Every game would still be huge because 1 loss could be enough to drop you out of the playoffs.

Also might make teams schedule better ooc games because losing one of those wouldn't be a season killer if you still won your conference.

Shane P. Hallam
10-13-2010, 08:45 AM
i agree. it would've been really smart to have ignored alabama/sc, because you just *knew* alabama would be in the small, 4 team playoff. i'm sure you'd have made sure to miss that game. until you missed it this year, and realized you missed one of the more important games of the season. then, you'd realize that a 12 game schedule means every single game actually makes a difference and that this bizarre analogy you *continue* to push doesn't actually make any sense at all.

edited to add: the alabama example is actually a funny one, given that it's completely counter to your entire argument. i will likely not watch them play again for the rest of the year, because they've been eliminated from any realistic shot at playing for the title. if there were a playoff, that wouldn't be the case.

you might as well have compared college football to major league baseball.

further, why does "this boise talk" matter now? who cares? no one is going to watch more BSU games than they would have otherwise. you're not going to watch more OSU games than you otherwise would have. there's no money being driven, and there's no traffic being driven by any of this. just potential anger at the BCS when BSU gets screwed out of the NCG by a one loss team, or by the fans of some BCS school who will pitch a fit about SOS when BSU makes it in ahead of their team.

so no. you're literally wrong on every single count, imho. the system only works for the NCAA because they have *never* tried a different one. that doesn't mean it's a good system, and it doesn't come close to meaning that it's the best system.

This isn't about me though, I will watch no matter what. The conversation is for the casual fan. For the fan who watches SportsCenter or listens to ESPN Radio and hears this talk and debate and becomes intrigued. Those are the viewers they are getting once again. The anger of the BCS still makes people tune in, whether it is wanting it to crash and burn, etc.

It's not the best system, a playoff would be, I'm just saying why it works for the NCAA and why it keeps college football relevant. There would never be a 4 team playoff (unless you count a Plus One system as such). All the major conferences would require auto-bids, then to include the Boise States, etc, you'd want some at large teams as well of course. It would be expanded, Alabama would still be in, the loss would not loom as large. I don't think the difference would be huge or make college football irrelevant, as long as the system works for the NCAA and BCS in terms of money, it will stay. As long as the money comes in, they WON'T try anything new.

brat316
10-13-2010, 09:10 AM
Yeah So if Utha runs the table, and beats TCU. How high do you think they can go? Say if BSU is still undefeated, and OSU get 1 loss.

RealityCheck
10-15-2010, 09:26 AM
2 SEC teams (one from each division) - LSU and South Carolina
2 Big 12 teams (one from each division) - Nebraska and Oklahoma
2 Big 10 teams - Ohio State and Michigan State
1 ACC team - Florida State
1 Big East team - West Virginia
1 Mountain West team - TCU
1 Pac-10 team - Oregon
3 at-large berths for SEC/B12/B10 - Alabama, Auburn and Oklahoma State
2 at-large berths for ACC/BE/Pac-10/MWC - Stanford and Utah
The best ranked team of WAC/C-USA/MAC/Sun Belt - Boise State

2 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 16
Awesomeness.

Smooth Criminal
10-15-2010, 09:54 AM
16 teams is too much. The teams making the finals would have to play 4 post season games, so the season would need shortened. College teams cant really be asked to play 12 games, a conference championship, then make a 4 game playoff.

I think 8 teams is the best. Only 4 teams in the nation are expected to play an extra game, 2 teams play 2 on top of what they do now. Potential for 16 games for the finalists still sounds like alot.

And shortening the season in order to make a playoff would definitely cost them money.

brat316
10-16-2010, 11:27 PM
So this thread now has some meaning behind it.

yodabear
10-17-2010, 12:26 AM
How about the 8 best teams playing each other. Tell me u would not want to see something like this....

1 Oregon vs. 8 Michigan State
4 Boise State vs 5 TCU
3 Oklahoma vs 6 Alabama
2 Auburn vs 7 Ohio State

Or something to that affect, kinda throwing **** out of my ass at this point....How can u argue against that as a college football fan? Look at the matchups and these matchups will mean something. They get to move on. Yeah I may see Oklahoma and Alabama in the Orange Bowl or something, but all they are fighting for is a bowl of oranges and a nice pay check. What is so wrong about this. I understand u would still have an argument about who team 9 is and all that, but thats like team 69 (haha 69!) now in the basketball tourney. At least we see a legit playoff as opposed to computer ****.

P-L
10-17-2010, 12:03 PM
meh, voters will find a way to leapfrog LSU, OU, Auburn, Michigan State, Oklahoma State, or Missouri over them.

not to mention moving alabama and OSU back up to the top rankings if they have to.
Yeah, I'll all but guarantee that Oklahoma or Auburn is #2 in the coaches poll.

LizardState
10-17-2010, 02:22 PM
Nov. 26th, Boise St. @ Nevada.

The @ is important, Nevada is for real. I watched them chew up an overrated Cal earlier this season. Boise St. will have all the media hype going in but Nevada at home

I think the Broncos bandwagon stops in Reno. If the Wolfpack wins out, will they be #1? If they did it for a MWC team they have to do it for a WAC team.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
10-17-2010, 02:33 PM
Nov. 26th, Boise St. @ Nevada.

The @ is important, Nevada is for real. I watched them chew up an overrated Cal earlier this season. Boise St. will have all the media hype going in but Nevada at home

I think the Broncos bandwagon stops in Reno. If the Wolfpack wins out, will they be #1? If they did it for a MWC team they have to do it for a WAC team.

Nevada 21
Hawaii 27

dwill333
10-17-2010, 05:52 PM
Don't be stupid. That doesn't count, it only matters where those teams where when they got beat.

But for other teams it will matter just not for Boise. If SC wins the SEC, well Bama lost to the SECzzz speeddzz champions, so its okay that they are ranked higher as a 1 loss team then the undefeated teams.

That isn't true... like every analyst in college football has said for 2 months now, boise fans are also osu and vt fans, because in their success lies boise. If at seasons end, voters are looking at the overall body of work, then the fact that a non aq team beat to bcs conference winners, that will carry quite a bit of weight, not to mention they will be the only team in the country to do so.

P-L
10-25-2010, 06:17 PM
Anyone look at the latest strength of schedule rankings?

According to Sagarin, Boise State has played the 69th toughest schedule in the country. Oregon? A whopping 10 places ahead, with the 59th toughest schedule. The mighty Buckeyes, who would've been a lock to play in the National Championship game if they went undefeated, played such a brutal schedule - the 72nd toughest.

The Anderson & Hester rankings have Boise State at #67. Oregon clocks in at #74.

Colley Matrix has Boise State at #85, but they rank Oregon's schedule #119!

Average of these three:

Oregon: 84th
Boise State: 74th

I hope all of you who are against putting Boise State in the National Championship game are also against Oregon making it!

Brent
10-25-2010, 07:36 PM
no team that's not in the BCS will ever be good. ever.
if they aint in no BCS member they aint worthy of no title shot!

brat316
10-25-2010, 07:46 PM
if they aint in no BCS member they aint worthy of no title shot!

ain't it the truth.

wonderbredd24
10-25-2010, 08:01 PM
Anyone look at the latest strength of schedule rankings?

According to Sagarin, Boise State has played the 69th toughest schedule in the country. Oregon? A whopping 10 places ahead, with the 59th toughest schedule. The mighty Buckeyes, who would've been a lock to play in the National Championship game if they went undefeated, played such a brutal schedule - the 72nd toughest.

The Anderson & Hester rankings have Boise State at #67. Oregon clocks in at #74.

Colley Matrix has Boise State at #85, but they rank Oregon's schedule #119!

Average of these three:

Oregon: 84th
Boise State: 74th

I hope all of you who are against putting Boise State in the National Championship game are also against Oregon making it!
Psshhht... I thought Portland State was a heavyweight.

The WAC is not nearly as bad as everyone wants to make it out to be... Nevada is solid and Hawaii is a pretty good team as well.

Brent
10-25-2010, 08:41 PM
on a sidenote, i've heard they're thinking about kicking out the big 8 (or whatever they'll be now), since CU's gone.
lol, they would never kick out Texas and OU

wonderbredd24
10-25-2010, 08:43 PM
on a sidenote, i've heard they're thinking about kicking out the big 8 (or whatever they'll be now), since CU's gone.
I have to think any discussion along these lines starts with the Big East.

Brent
10-25-2010, 08:47 PM
i just wanted a dig at ut and ou. since it's likely we'll go about 8 years since the last time we beat either, by the time we finally get to stop playing them.
it's okay, I am an alum from the red-headed stepchild of the UT/OU/TAMU triangle.

P-L
11-13-2010, 12:58 PM
If Auburn or Oregon lose does LSU, Wisconsin, or Stanford jump past Boise and TCU? What does you guys think?

Nikolas
11-13-2010, 03:02 PM
The winner of the SEC will be in the BCS Championship game no matter what. The voters love to promote whichever team in the SEC comes out on top, regardless of record.

My guess is that Oregon wins out, Auburn loses to Alabama and then wins the SEC championship game to end up #2.

What I would LOVE to see is Auburn and Oregon both to lose, and the #1 and #2 teams be Boise State and TCU. Not because I think these two teams are more deserving, but because I feel such a result would cause the BCS to create a playoff system.

As long as teams get to decide their own schedules (at least the OOC games), you're going to have situations like this.

SickwithIt1010
11-13-2010, 04:55 PM
If Auburn or Oregon lose does LSU, Wisconsin, or Stanford jump past Boise and TCU? What does you guys think?

probably because thats always how it seems to work...


its bull **** but....whatever